TheRoyale90
Member
Last edited:
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
What a former player told me in the summer of 2007
- Thread starter Nor Cal Buff
- Start date
:yeahthat:
Serious question; How did they earn it?
That 2001 team had gone 3-8 the year before and was heading in to a game against csu, a team that they had lost to in 1999 and 2000
Last edited:
BlackNGold
Club Member
Trust me when I say that I am not arguing, nor am defending Hawk. But we had pretty high expectations this year as well (high relative to the last few years anyway). That 2001 team had proven nothing at the time they lost to Fresno, but there were lofty expectations. People were very upset about that loss when it happened....just like this year.
As I stated in a previous post, where we go from here will be very telling.
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
while i agree this team appears less physical than Barney's squads: it's natural for a guy to be loyal to his coach when there's a "regime change". additionally, they may have never lost to KU but they did lose to Iowa State a couple times and at Baylor when BU was dreadful. KU won a BCS bowl in the Hawk era, ISU has never won a BCS bowl and was at best a 6 (maybe 7) win team in the Barnett era.
Last edited:
I'm tired of people taking comments from Akarika Dawn or whoever, and using them to destroy the coach when you admit that there wasn't a hint of "ill will". Here's the deal - you guys are piling on. If we win the next 10 in the row, do we really want to be passing on third hand garbage that makes this guy look bad?
The coach has results to fall back on and right now they aren't good. That's it. Nothing else. I don't know about Zen, Philosophy, Nepotism, talking too much, etc. I care about coaching and winning ONLY.
I expect a lot of improvement this year and that first game was a disaster. I'm sick of that and I want improvement. But I'm also sick of all this third hand mojo ****. I have kids in the athletic program who hang with football players and they do NOT echo this crap. That's a fact. Let's stick to facts. There's plenty of facts that make Hawkins look bad right now. Their called LOSSES.
Rant over.
TheRoyale90
Member
Unleash Hell
Well-Known Member
TheRoyale90
Member
Last edited:
You are mis-remembering.:smile2:
Barnett arrives in Boulder, We lose to a csu team that CU hadn't lost to since 1986. Then we do it again in 2000 and proceed to go 3-8. Yes we kept games close that year, but after losing to Fresno in the opener in 2001, when expectations were high, there wasn't anyone giving Barnett the benefit of the doubt.
Oh, and MH hurt his hip...not his ACL
Unleash Hell, TheRoyale90, Bill Cody, BlackNGold, Buff fanatic and BlackNGold....
its like LincolnBuff took over 6 computers at once and is posting with each of his different personalities and not a single friggin one knows how to work the quote function.
all of you dumbasses go sit in the corner until you can figure out how to properly use the quote function. some of you idots were arguing with yourselfs according to the quote.
friggin amatuers...
:lol:
:smile2:
its like LincolnBuff took over 6 computers at once and is posting with each of his different personalities and not a single friggin one knows how to work the quote function.
all of you dumbasses go sit in the corner until you can figure out how to properly use the quote function. some of you idots were arguing with yourselfs according to the quote.
friggin amatuers...
:lol:
:smile2:
TheRoyale90
Member
You could be right about the injury but really, a hip injury kept him out for as long as it did? That seems odd. At any rate I maintain that the competitiveness of the 2000 squad coupled with the fact that Craig Ochs had shown some real skills led us to believe that 2001 would be a breakout year and it was. Also you are comparing apples to oranges. What in the last 3 years of putrid play would lead you to believe that this year's game against CSU is an aberration? I hear a lot of 'oh it's only the first game' going around as if this season exists in a vacuum. This team and this first game performance is a continuation of everything that has come before. Why should we give hawk another benefit of the doubt? Haven't we done that enough? I think the bottom line is that we as fans seem to be divided into two principle camps: one that says nothing short of excellence (or in lieu of that competence) is acceptable juxtaposed against the "realists" who believe it's just a game and we should always give the benefit of the doubt and things are perpetually 'headed in the right direction'. The second view might seem to be reasonable and even keeled but it strikes me as complacence. We've been so reduced as a program and as a fan base that we're talking about hoping we beat Toledo to stave off our continuing humiliation for one more day. Is this all there is? Are we to be a program like Northwestern that has a good year once a decade and spends most of the time getting hammered? If so maybe we should all get used to chanting "that's all right, that's okay we will own your farm someday" as the Northwestern fans do.
TheRoyale90
Member
The multi quote function isn't working right. Mine started doing that on the first message I responded to. Oh and **** yourself.
:duel2:opcorn:
:bs:
amature.
TheRoyale90
Member
Ouch. Way to hit me where I live. In my forum posting skillz. Wha..ha..happened was my keyboard groupings are fail.
excuses....
we better start seeing some results if you wanna come out of that corner.
TheRoyale90
Member
excuses....
we better start seeing some results if you wanna come out of that corner.
Just need to fix the little things and get some calls. My keyboard groupings are nicked up but we're on the right track.
Hey, I am not defending Hawk here. I am on board with the fact that sunday was not good enough...period. There has been zero proven in the last 3 years. I have publicly stated that Hawk has probably done plenty of good off the field in the last 3 years, and it needed to be done. But, this is the year that they NEED to show progress with wins.
All I am pointing out is that in 2001, everyone was not just sitting back and saying "oh well, we know that they are going to have a great year anyway". There was plenty for the fan base to be concerned about, especially after that loss to Fresno. Revisionist historians we are all.
i suppose they have been great when you practice with them, eh?
ok, thats 3 quotes in a row that are correct. you can come out of the corner now.
just remember to fart a little as you get up to provide some motivation for the others.
TheRoyale90
Member
Fair enough. I think it's worth noting though that we lost that game 24-22 and were driving for the winning score. What happened on sunday absolutely should have been 37-17 because the lambs dropped an easy touchdown pass and they were sitting on our doorstep at the end in the victory formation. If they had a Spurrier type coach they would have rubbed it in. They took pity on us. Make of that what you will.
buffsyko
Club Member
Matt was a bad ass and played better than the soft DL we have now, mother ****er.
Nor Cal Buff
Well-Known Member
I'll freely admit I was very drunk when I was posted this and probably should not have. However, why do you choose to defend Hawkins so vehemently when everything out there points to him being our Ty Willingham? Go ask a Washington fan what their boards were like in 2007 and 2008 and ask them what they went through. I don't want to see us go to those depths, ever.
Ehhhhhh.:boring: Go tell them they're soft. You've seen them one game. As for Matt---okay??? He was good I guess. If having lots of tats makes you not soft, he isnt soft. Im sure hes a good dude, and I have no beef if he was talking about the coach's, if he, LIKE YOU, was referring to the players---he's a d-bag. Like you. :thumbsup:
I've said numerous times that the team looks soft and plays soft.
I honestly don't mean that as a personal attack on the players. For example and in particular, I have called the offensive line soft. But I know that the guys, Miller and Givens most definitely, are fighters. But Sunday night after the game CSU's defensive coordinator called them pvssies.
That's one of the big things that enraged me. That's the thing that bothers me so much about what's going on. We've got tough kids giving their all and we've got assistant coaches on the CU offensive staff in Denver, Kiesau and Hagan that want to play smash mouth... but an offense that is still playing finesse football. As I've stated before, the head coaching zen philosophy is poisoning this team and making it soft.
The "soft" critique goes squarely to the top. And, frankly, if the players are taking the "soft" critique personally then that's fine too. If they can use it to get pissed off and geared up to bust some heads against Toledo, all the better.
I honestly don't mean that as a personal attack on the players. For example and in particular, I have called the offensive line soft. But I know that the guys, Miller and Givens most definitely, are fighters. But Sunday night after the game CSU's defensive coordinator called them pvssies.
That's one of the big things that enraged me. That's the thing that bothers me so much about what's going on. We've got tough kids giving their all and we've got assistant coaches on the CU offensive staff in Denver, Kiesau and Hagan that want to play smash mouth... but an offense that is still playing finesse football. As I've stated before, the head coaching zen philosophy is poisoning this team and making it soft.
The "soft" critique goes squarely to the top. And, frankly, if the players are taking the "soft" critique personally then that's fine too. If they can use it to get pissed off and geared up to bust some heads against Toledo, all the better.
buffs04
Well-Known Member
After one game?
While CU was losing "it's only one game" to CSU, the rest of the conference was steamrolling their respective cupcakes.
Missouri, a team most on board picked CU to "easily beat" this year, beat a team it was not favored against by 20 points.
Look around CFB scoreboards. THe overwhelming majority of BCS schools beat up on their week one cupcakes.
CU lost. Badly.
We even got a spot on the college gameday or whatever "30 second blurbs of teams who were horribly embarrassed on opening day". Guess what? It was a pretty short list.
While CU was losing "it's only one game" to CSU, the rest of the conference was steamrolling their respective cupcakes.
Missouri, a team most on board picked CU to "easily beat" this year, beat a team it was not favored against by 20 points.
Look around CFB scoreboards. THe overwhelming majority of BCS schools beat up on their week one cupcakes.
CU lost. Badly.
We even got a spot on the college gameday or whatever "30 second blurbs of teams who were horribly embarrassed on opening day". Guess what? It was a pretty short list.